Wednesday, November 21, 2012

The Anti Homosexuality Bill, 2009 offers no solution to the homosexuality challenge: clean up the systems; for that is the best Christmas gift you can ever give to Ugandans


NCAHSAU

NATIONAL COALITION AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY & SEXUAL ABUSES IN UGANDA

P. O. Box 11902 Kampala, Uganda

 

 

 

19th November 2012

 

 

The Honorable Speaker of Parliament

The Republic of Uganda,

Kampala.

 

C.c: Hon Stephen Tashobya, Chairman, Committee on Legal & Parliamentary Affairs

C.c: Members of Parliament

C.c: All leaders

 

Ref: The Anti Homosexuality Bill, 2009 offers no solution to the homosexuality challenge: clean up the systems; for that is the best Christmas gift you can ever give to Ugandans

 

Thanks for your continued contributions toward nation-building, especially your public stand against homosexuality and sexual abuses in Uganda, evidenced by your consideration of the 2009 anti-homosexuality Bill in line of your desire that this country must be a better one to live in.

 

I refer to our Report And Petition On Homosexuality In Uganda to you dated September 30th 2009 in which we highlighted the homosexuality problem and showed need for an inquiry, and the petition against the Anti-homosexuality Bill 2009, dated 7/7/2010, both acknowledged received but seem to have been totally ignored; and the now very populist, opportunistic, reactionary and hypocritical push by religious leaders that Parliament proceeds fast to pass the bill, riding on the popular demand by the masses that homosexuality is curtailed.

 

It needs to be clearly understood that the basis of our anti-homosexuality initiatives since 2006 which culminated into formation of the NCAHSAU in October 2008 to sensitize the public about the challenge and dangers of homosexuality and sexual abuses, and the now hurried populist, opportunistic and hypocritical bill ‘against’ homosexuality which is before Parliament, was the health and emotional plights of victims and their failure to access justice and redress, and the fact that many youths (both sexes) are forced or lured into it in schools, churches and local communities.

 

Sadly, the Uganda Police CID, in effort to cover up their dirty role in the Pr Robert Kayanja sodomy saga has continued to work hard to portray the awareness campaign as baseless, heresies and frame-ups intended to tarnish people’s reputations without due consideration that many victims exist in religious entities, schools, work places, homes and other communities. And for that reason, some of us were framed, falsely accused of conspiring to tarnish Pr Robert Kayanja’s reputation and trade, denied opportunity to defend ourselves and wrongly convicted just because we dared to receive, counsel and refer to Police young men who accused him of sodomizing them. We have witnessed not only corruption but abuse of the systems: Police, DPP and courts of law, of the highest order.

 

Therefore, though we commend Parliament for determining Uganda’s legal paths and fully support all efforts toward enacting good, relevant, fair and applicable laws, we feel all diligence should be taken to ensure just that by not hurrying to enact populist laws that can end up hurting good causes.

 

As you may well remember, in 2009 as the nationwide campaign against homosexuality and sexual abuses in Uganda launched in October 2008 progressed, Hon David Bahati and his team came up with the anti-homosexuality Bill 2009. Though it may have been well-intentioned, we feel that it will not achieve what many Ugandans think it will achieve; is a waste of precious time, financial and other resources that should have been applied more productively elsewhere because of the following:

 

  1. Existing laws are sufficient if only enforced:

 

On the Penal Code are very good laws sufficient to address homosexuality and the abuse of children which the proposed law is purportedly intended to address:

 

a.      The Penal Code Act (Cap 120):

 

Section 145 on un-natural sex offenses also criminalizes same sex sexual activity. In May 2010, this same law, inherited from colonial times was used in Malawi to convict and sentence to 14 years in jail for gross indecency and unnatural acts a practicing gay couple, Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chumbalanga, only that Malawian President Bingu wa Mutharika pardoned them due to foreign pressure (Daily Monitor 31 May 2010). UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon ensured their release!

 

Back home in Uganda, this same law was used by His Worship Byaruhanga Jesse R, Chief Magistrate Luwero, to convict on own plea of guilt and sentence one Kavuma Sadique Fahad, a teacher of Zakayo Musisi Memorial Primary School, Luwero, to 3 years on each of the two counts of sodomizing two of his primary 7 pupils (Nakibinge Ssozi Dan, 13 years old, Criminal Case No 458 of 2010 (Annex 1), and Dan Nkoyoyo, 14 years old, Criminal Case No 459 of 2010 (Annex 2). Because of the ages of victims, this offender would have been more appropriately charged under The Penal Code Amendment Act 2007.

 

It is therefore improper to claim that this law is insufficient when this man was arrested, prosecuted, convicted and sentenced only after our intervention and the story serialized on WBS TV investigative program, Vumbula and covered by the Red Pepper.

 

b.      The Constitution

 

The Constitution of Uganda only considers marriage when between two people of opposite sexes: male and female (man and woman). Any relationship other than that is un-constitutional. So if there is a law that protects the traditional heterosexual family and marriage, it is the constitution.

 

Article 31.3 specifically says: “Marriage shall be entered into with the free consent of the man and woman intending to marry.”

 

It neither says man and man or woman and woman intending to marry. Therefore, even a consensual sexual relationship between two adults of the same sex is not only criminal under the Penal Code Act, Cap 120, section 145, but in breach of Article 31.3 of the Constitution.

 

The argument that this Anti-homosexuality Bill, 2009 is intended to protect the traditional heterosexual marriage, family values and culture holds no water when already provided for by the Constitution and only needs enforcement all times. Further argument that it will stop homosexuals getting married in places of worship makes no sense when the majority of Ugandan heterosexuals couples simply cohabit, and homosexuals can choose to simply follow suit and cohabit.

 

c.      The Penal Code Amendment Act 2007

 

This law was made to give equal protection to male and female children who are below 18 years of age against sexual abuse and exploitation. It deems them lacking capacity to bargain for sex.

 

Section 2 of this Amendment specifically says:

 

“2. Section 129 of the Penal code is replaced:

 

The Principal Act is amended by substituting for section the following new sections:

 

129. ‘Defilement of persons under eighteen years of age:

 

1. Any person who performs a sexual act with another person who is below the age of eighteen years commits a felony known as defilement and is on conviction liable to life imprisonment.

 

2. Any person who attempts to perform a sexual act with another person who is below the age of eighteen years commits an offense and is on conviction liable to imprisonment not exceeding eighteen years.

 

3. Any person who performs a sexual act with another person who is below the age of eighteen years in any of the circumstances specified in subsection 4 commits a felony called aggravated defilement and is on conviction by the High Court liable to suffer death.

 

4. The circumstances referred to in subsection 3 are as follows:

 

a)      Where the person against whom the offense is committed is below the age of fourteen years;

b)      Where the offender is infected with the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV);

c)      Where the offender is a parent or guardian of or a person in authority over the person against whom the offense is committed;

d)      Where the victim of the offense is a person with a disability; or

e)      Where the offender is a serial offender.

 

5. Any person who attempts to perform a sexual act with another person below the age of eighteen years in any of the circumstances specified in subsection 4 commits an offense and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.

 

6.  Where a person is charged with the offense under this section that person shall undergo a medical examination as to his or her Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) status.

 

7. In this section:

 

Ø  Disability” means a substantial functional limitation of daily life activities caused by physical, mental or sensory impairment and environment barriers resulting in limited participation;

 

Ø  “Serial offender” means a person means a person who has a previous conviction for the offense of defilement or aggravated defilement;

 

Ø  “Sexual act” means:

a)      Penetration of the vagina, mouth or anus, however slight, of any person by a sexual organ;

b)      The unlawful use of any object or organ by a person on another person’s sexual organ;

 

Ø  “Sexual organ” mean a vagina or a penis

 

129A: Child to child sex:

 

1.      Where the offender in the case of any offense under section 129 is a child under the age of twelve years, the matter shall be dealt with as required by Part V of the Children Act

 

2.      Where an offense under section 129 is committed by a male child and a female child upon each other when each is not below the age of twelve years of age, each of the offenders shall be dealt with by Part X of the Children Act.

 

129B: Payment of compensation to victims of defilement:

 

1.      Where a person is convicted of defilement or aggravated defilement under section 129, court may, in addition to any sentence imposed on the offender, order that the victim of the offense be paid compensation by the offender for any physical, sexual and psychological harm caused to the victim by the offense.

 

2.      The amount of compensation shall be determined by the court and the court shall take into account the extent of harm suffered by the victim of the offence, the degree of force used by the offender and medical and other expenses incurred by the victim as a result of the offence”  

Copy of this Penal Code Amendment 2007, thoroughly discussed, passed and assented to by H.E. President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni is attached for your perusal (See Annex 3).

 

Surprisingly, most Police officers and Resident State Attorneys supposed to ensure its enforcement are ignorant of not only its provisions, but its existence altogether and even if they do, they never implement it.

 

Similarly, most Parliamentarians seem ignorant about it despite the fact that some, including the mover of the Bill, Hon David Bahati must have participated in its formulation process (unless they missed its sessions or simply never paid attention as it was debated and passed) otherwise, they would not have come up with the Anti-homosexuality Bill 2009.

 

To prove that some know but may just be duplicating laws to please the masses is the fact that key chunks of this Penal Code Amendment 2007 on Aggravated defilement were just copied and pasted (imported) into the much publicised ‘Anti homosexuality bill 2009’ to cater for ‘Aggravated Homosexuality.’ This cannot be a mere co-incidence!

 

Apparently, the greatest and most important aim of the Hon Bahati Anti Homosexuality Bill 2009: protecting children is better catered for by this Penal Code Amendment 2007.

 

Sections of the Anti Homosexuality Bill that have attracted most attention of Ugandans (who think there is no law as the rhetoric goes) to support it, and fury from the West with threats of cutting aid are already part of the assented to law and need not be repeated. The children are protected, both male and female against both heterosexual and homosexual abusers (defilers / paedophiles). What now remains to be seen is the will to enforce this law that has been on our law books since 2007 so that it bites perpetrators of sexual abuses of children.

 

Why should we then pass a contentious or weaker law where the maximum sentence on conviction is years in jail when we have one that is not being enforced where the maximum sentence is death!

 

The argument that the Anti-homosexuality Bill 2009 will stop procurement, promoting, disseminating literature and other pornographic materials concerning the offense of homosexuality is so weak and can be addressed when dealing with every kind of pornography irrespective of sexual inclination. There is no point enacting a law that deals with just homosexuality pornography while leaving out heterosexuality pornography which is equally damaging and wrecking the lives of youths.

 

Besides, once an activity is illegal, it is obvious that indulging in it is tantamount to committing an illegality and therefore an offense.

 

  1. The Anti-homosexuality Bill 2009 not only lacks basis but complicates the challenge and fight against homosexuality because of the following:

 

a)     Part ii section 6: Confidentiality

 

Clause 2 gives court powers to block the media from court proceedings: Though we agree with confidentiality, we disagree with giving court powers to block the media from hearings on pretext of ‘protecting victim children’ or as it ‘may consider appropriate.’ The media has sufficient professional ethics and codes to protect victim children and other parties and must not be denied access to proceedings, no matter the excuse.

 

The clause can be abused by corrupt courts to protect powerful offenders from exposure.

 

Besides, this clause conflicts not only with the constitution of Uganda which guarantees all people of Uganda the right to information (Article 41) and freedom of speech and expression (Article 29), but also conflicts with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19 which guarantees the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

 

Clause 3 penalizes journalists: Just like the previous clause, we disagree with penalizing the media for publishing ‘...  names and personal circumstances or any other information tending to establish the victim’s identity without authority of court.’ There is no doubt that it conflicts with both Uganda’s constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 

As a matter of fact, prior to the proposed Bill and after, it is the media (not religious institutions now riding on the populist tide to push for the bill, or institutions and agencies of Government) which has diligently played its role to expose homosexuality, the plight of victims and the power and impunity of culprits. Had this clause been in force, most, if not all would be penalized.

 

This clause can be abused by corrupt courts just to deny the public the right to information.

 

Besides, considering the penalties involved, this clause may intimidate the media and stop it from running any stories no matter how much victims may want their stories known.

.

This clause can be used to protect powerful homosexuals while strangling the media to the disadvantage of victims and society, especially children.

 

Apparently, most evil doers fear exposure in the media more than they fear actions in courts of law for they know how to beat the systems.

 

Part iii section 9: Procuring homosexuality by threats:

 

Clause 2 provides: ‘A person shall not be convicted of homosexuality under this section upon the evidence of one witness only, unless corroborated in some material particular by evidence implicating the accused.’

 

Instead of making it easier to prove homosexuality, convict offenders and deliver justice and redress to victims, this clause makes it more difficult to do so.

 

It is common sense that except in miraculous circumstances, no third parties can witness live homosexual activity because of its secretiveness as a sexual act.

 

Secondly, except for one time or amateur offenders, serial offenders may not be that foolish to attract witnesses or leave incriminating evidence.

 

Yet even where corroborative evidence exists, it is possible to compromise witnesses and the investigative machinery, including the Police surgeon just to kill cases.

 

Besides, it is possible to offend, traumatize and intimidate a victim into silence that by the time the same gains courage to seek help or justice, verifiable evidence of the act is no more.

 

It ought to be understood that absence of evidence of homosexuality doesn’t mean the offence wasn’t committed, just as disappearance of physical signs of hurt doesn’t necessarily mean a victim’s total healing. It needs to be noted that emotional hurt is more damaging and lasting than physical hurt, is cause for many victims’ addiction to drugs and the very reason circumstantial evidence in sexual offenses is very important.

 

Therefore far from protecting children and easing justice and redress to victims, this clause gives pedophile and other offenders the green light to continue their practice more wisely and secretively without incriminating witnesses and corroborative evidence.

 

Part iii section 14: Failure to disclose the offence:

 

This clause requires all people in authority to report homosexuality within 24 hours: This is laying trap for virtually all adult Ugandans. This clause turns all well positioned Ugandans, including spiritual / religious leaders, counselors, medical doctors, political and others who owe their clientele a duty of confidentiality into state informers.

 

It also turns desperate parents, guardians and household heads struggling with problems and challenges of parenting and families, into spies on members of their households.

 

It similarly turns employers: directors, managers, supervisors, etc into spies on the sexual lives of their employees and subordinates.

It makes silence a criminal offence just as speaking out can prove to be a grave unwritten offence because of high corruption and abuse of the Police, Directorate of Public Prosecutions and judicial systems.

 

It dismantles all ethical codes of conduct with regard to confidentiality, scares people from confidentiality and kills the spirit of love, care and concern for other people that has characterized the traditions of all the people in Uganda and religious fiber, and contravenes the spirit of nationalism, care and concern for the weak and voiceless that formed the core and fiber of the National Resistance Armed struggle.

 

We believe that whereas you may counsel victims to overcome pain, fears and stigma, and file complaints, you can’t compel them or their offenders to recount what really happened.

 

There is even no guarantee that victims who file complaints will maintain their statements, either because of harassments or compromising offers given them, or trauma which curtails memory power.

 

During 2008 and 2009, under The National Coalition Against Homosexuality and Sexual Abuses in Uganda, I and my colleagues helped some young men who confessed to have been sodomized to seek justice. After being compromised, the Police CID conspired with suspects to kill all the cases, frame, persecute and harass us to intimidate and silence all other victims that may have contemplated breaking silence and seeking justice and redress.

 

It is no secret that I and my colleagues Pr Martin Sempa, Pr Michael David Kyazze, Pr Robert Kaira, Deborah Anita Kyomuhendo and David Mukalazi whose own complaint was never investigated were framed, prosecuted, denied opportunity to defend ourselves and wrongly convicted with all due impunity on tramped up conspiracy charges filed against us by Pr Robert Kayanja, allegedly to tarnish his reputation and trade with sodomy just because we tried to help young men who came pleading for mercy, accusing him of sodomizing / sexually abusing them. We have witnessed systems used and abused, and Police officers including the CID boss tell lies against us, on oath, and with all impunity!

 

(It is sad and very unfortunate that we can’t address the homosexuality challenge without reference to homosexuality accusations against religious leaders in our midst). 

 

The hostile environment we have already encountered in the court system and ability of Police CID to manufacture and / or falsify evidence, and / or deliberately ignore evidence are just enough to convince us and every right thinking Ugandan that given the rampant corruption in our systems, justice and redress for victims must still be a mere dream no matter how tough our laws may be.

 

This clause, Part iii section 14, also conflicts with Article 29 of Uganda’s constitution:

 

With that in mind, it tramples on the right to freedom of conscience and speech as enshrined in Article 29 of our constitution. A person can write or speak out on anything if certain that no trouble beyond what can be managed shall arise. If he or she chooses to keep quiet, it is his / her right. You can’t force him / her.

 

This clause also contravenes the right to privacy and professional / ethical confidentiality.

 

You can’t compel spiritual leaders, medical practitioners, counselors and other professionals to breach confidentiality of devotees, patients or clients who open up to them. It not only contravenes the constitution but also their work ethics. It can compel both victims and those struggling to quit the vice never to open up or even seek medical or emotional counsel; and compel religious, medical and other counselors to discriminate them when providing services.

 

This clause can be abused by people who want to destroy others:

 

Enemies, rivals or competitors of people in authority may use it, secretly plant homosexuals then report them (people in authority) for not reporting the offence, just to hurt or cripple them.

 This clause spares people who conspire to deliberately kill cases:

 

This clause omits penalizing people in state investigative and other systems that deliberately and with impunity harass, torture and frame victims and Good Samaritans who dare to report homosexuality and pedophilia, and kill cases due to corruptions and order from above. It is so unfair and unrealistic to penalize a person who doesn’t report an offence, yet leave that one who kills the cases reported.

 

Killing cases not only diminishes people’s trust in the entire investigative and judicial process but encourages mob-justice. Our Report And Petition On Homosexuality In Uganda to Parliament dated September 30th 2009 clearly spells the problems and challenges facing the anti-homosexuality and sexual abuses campaign.

 

Rather than target people in authority (medical personnel, parents, guardians, counselors, spiritual leaders, employers, and others who by virtue of their positions may get to know about homosexuality offences) this clause should have specifically targeted people in all state systems that deliberately and with impunity conspire to harass, torture and frame victims, Good Samaritans and others who dare to report homosexuality, and kill cases because of corruptions, connections and order from above.

 

In all cases, people who volunteer information on homosexuality must be protected from any miscarriage of justice, not under the Police Witness Protection known to detain and harass victims.

 

We believe this is the only way to build confidence and encourage victims and other people to report homosexuality and other sexual abuse offences; not compelling them with threats of reprimands if they do not.

 

  1. Homosexuals know where to hide:

 

As already stated in our Petition against this bill, besides using accomplices in the systems that are supposed to enforce the law and ensure justice and redress, homosexuals hide in the constitution.

 

It is a fact that though breaking the penal code, consenting adult homosexuals can hide in Article 27 of the Constitution of Uganda which guarantees the right to privacy of one’s home for every person in Uganda without exception, for protection.  

 

Seriousness in fighting homosexuality entails Parliament to first amend Article 27 of the constitution to exclude homosexuals from the right to privacy. If not done, homos may deliberately consummate to be arrested, then claim persecution and infringement on their right to privacy, and seek monetary redress from the Attorney General just like lesbian Victor Mukasa and her female partner Yvonne Oyo hid under articles 20-45 and applied to High Court under article 50 of the constitution and were awarded U Shs 13,000,000 (Victor Juliet Mukasa and Yvonne Oyo Vs Attorney General Miscellaneous Cause No 24/06). Awards may be used to lure the vulnerable into homosexuality.

 

In the Victor Mukasa case, probably aware of the supremacy of the Constitution and International obligations, the Attorney General never appealed. It is a precedent applicable to all lower courts.

 

Besides, in the High Court, Kampala, Miscellaneous Cause No 163 of 2010 before Hon Mr Justice V. F. Musoke-Kibuuka: Kasha Jacqueline, David Kato Kisuule and Onziema Patience Vs Rolling Stone and Giles Muhame (Annex 4), the applicants were awarded Shs 1,500,000 each plus costs of their suit because of infringement inter alia on their rights to privacy by the respondents.   

 

Therefore, with the constitution interpreted to guarantee the right to privacy of even homosexuals, no law can effectively handle consenting adults unless the constitution is amended to exclude them.

 

  1. Uganda’s problem is not absence of good laws, but lack of the will in Systems to enforce the law and ensure justice, fairness and redress:

 

There is no doubt that the situation in institutions like the Police, Directorate of Public Prosecutions and judiciary is wanting. In many situations, these institutions are used and abused with all due impunity to harass the weak and frustrate justice and redress for the weak and voiceless that many people have not only lost trust in them, but have ceased respect for them: they only fear them and turn to them as a formality but with no hope of ever accessing justice and redress if the offender is rich, powerful or connected to ‘Order from above.’

 

There is need to clean up the systems wherein cases reported are killed and which have compelled many Ugandans to resort to mob-justice. We find it very difficult to refer more victims to Police having been not only frustrated, but greatly tormented in our earlier endeavor.

 

It should not only be a matter of enacting laws, but ensuring that they are enforced without bias.

 

  1. The Anti Homosexuality Bill 2009 defines lack of understanding of the problem:

 

Ø  It presumes that systems: Police, DPP and judiciary are perfect and actually work when not.

Ø  It doesn’t put into consideration causes of indulgence into homosexuality.

Ø  Simple logic dictates that no qualified prudent medical doctor can prescribe treatment for a patient without diagnosis of the problem. Therefore, no legislator can make appropriate laws without diagnosing the problems he / she wants addressed in-depth.

 

We already have many laws in Uganda, some of which prescribe death sentences but people still commit crimes, including aggravated defilement, gruesome murders and human sacrifice with impunity. Besides, despite convictions, it is very many years since any death sentence was last executed. So why pass a law whose enforcement will not pass?

 

There is need to understand why, despite existing laws, crime, including homosexuality continues to rise, with authentic empirical evidence.

 

As former Singapore Premier Lee Kwan Yew said; ‘To understand the present and anticipate the future, one must know enough of the past; enough to have a sense of the history of a people;’ we believe there is no way we can get to the roots of homosexuality and define the best way forward in terms of laws, policies and other interventions without an independent inquiry.

 

Therefore, Parliament should not simply ignore demands for an inquiry and jump to make a law whose basis is superficial and reactionary, and whose impact must be of no positive consequence since it is still to be enforced by the same stinking corrupt systems: Police, DPP and judiciary.

 

We believe that any law on homosexuality, however effective simply solves 1% of the problem, leaving 99% to be solved by other interventions.

 

  1. The best way forward:

 

  1. There is need to admit and localize the problem without blaming it on the Western World influence as if when the West got out of Uganda, homosexuality would be gone.

 

  1. Thoroughly diagnose the problem

 

This can be done through an inquiry mandated to investigate among others the following:

  • The extent of sodomy in Uganda, unveiling existing cells;
  • The victims in all aspects;
  • The culprits and their collaborators;
  • The plight and silence of victims;
  • The role of the helpers (Good Samaritans);
  • The role of the investigative machinery including the Police surgeons in killing cases reported;
  • The role of order from above in killing cases.

 

The Anti Homosexuality Bill 2009 proves to be very diversionary in this respect.

 

  1. Preventive measures:

 

To address the challenge of homosexuality, there is need to address all the factors that compel people into homosexuality bearing in mind that homosexuality is not genetic, but a habit gradually learned.

 

There is therefore need for among others, the following to be done:

 

  1. Establish a fully paid-for national counseling system where people’s social, spiritual, economic and other problems and challenges can be addressed.

 

It is a known fact that many people struggling with hetero-sexual pre-marital, marital, family, social and other relationships get compelled to hate the opposite sex and settle for same-sex attraction for solace and comfort and become potential recruits for homosexuality. No tough law can compel them to change attitude.

 

Though some religious institutions offer counseling, much of it is manipulation and many people fall prey to religious mafia masquerading expert counselors.

 

  1. Establish a fully government supported national sensitization campaign on homosexuality, its causes, dangers and preventive package, just like it is with HIV.

 

  1. Robustly deal with hetero-sexual rape and defilement, one of the key factors compelling young females into homosexuality, bearing in mind that there can’t be rape in marriage.

 

  1. Either let Government sponsor all students in universities and tertiary institutions who cannot afford to pay for their tuition, or give them long-term loans which are repayable when they are in employment. This will save many young people from homosexuality who get lured into indulgence when in dire need of tuition money for their studies lest they drop out.

 

  1. Government robustly deals with poverty and unemployment, not by mere rhetoric, which are major causes of young people turning homosexuals for a living. Blaming the West for their money which has homosexuality strings attached is greatly missing the point.

 

  1. Curative measures:

 

To help those who voluntarily want to quit homosexuality, let there be a rehabilitation / counseling system to help them back on course bearing in mind that homosexuality is not born, but a habit that is gradually learned and addicted to.

 

Finally, should the bill be passed, just be sure that homosexuals will petition superior court to interpret its consistence with the constitution and whether you like it or not, judgment will be in their favor and Uganda will follow countries like India, China, Hongkong, Israel and US as a nation where consensual homosexuality was legalized not by Acts of parliament but through judicial decisions.

 

In light of all the above, we call on you to drop the populist, opportunistic and reactionary Anti-homosexuality bill 2009, initiate an independent inquiry as per petition dated September 30th 2009, and consider the summary of our proposed way forward. Otherwise, we are bound to have a law that makes it more difficult to address the homosexuality challenge and prompt homosexuals to expedite their legalization through judicial decisions. Let the two High Court decisions cited be lesson enough.

 

We re-iterate that Uganda’s problem is not the laws, but systems supposed to enforce the laws to ensure justice and redress to all, and include the Police, Directorate of Public Prosecutions and judiciary. We have plenty of good laws on our books but systems have let us down, and you know it!!

 

Therefore, be courageous and clean up the systems: it is the best Christmas gift you can ever give to Ugandans. The rest is a mockery when systems are stinking rotten, favoring law breakers.

 

For God and my Country.

 

Yours sincerely,

For and on behalf of NCAHSAU,

 

 

Moses Solomon Male

- Pr / Executive Director Arising For Christ

- Publicity Secretary, National Committee on Cults & False Teaching Awareness.

- Leader, National Coalition Against Homosexuality & Sexual Abuses in Uganda.

256-772-479386 / 256-702-196511 msmalearch@gmail.com

No comments: